Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm min 1976/04/12 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITy pLANN~!NG COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA April 12, 1976 A regular meeting of the City Planning Commission of Chula Vsita, California was held on the aboYe date beginning at 7:00 p.m. with the following members present: Chandler, Rudolph, Floto, Starr and Smith. Absent (with previous notification): Commissioners Johnson and Pressutti. Also present: Director of Planning Peterson, Current Planning Supervisor Lee, Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt, Assistant City Attorney Beam, and Secretary Mapes. The pledge of allegiance to the flag was led by Chairman Chandler, followed by a moment of silent prayer. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MSC (Rudolph-Floto) The minutes of the meeting of March 22, 1976 be approved as written. Commissioner Smith abstained from voting on the motion due to his absence from that meeting. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS The Chairman called for oral communications and none were presented. 1. Public Hearing: Change of prezoning PCZ-76-C from P-C to R-1-H-P for 2.~ acres located at the easterly terminus of East J Street- Shattuck Constru~t~6n Company Director of Planning Peterson noted that a condition of approval of the tentative map for South Bay Villas required that the developer extend East J Street to provide primary access to the tract. This required annexation and prezoning of land for the proposed street. The applicant has acquired a total of 2.5 acres and filed a tentative map for 9 lots adjacent to the proposed extension of East "J" Street. This property was formerly prezoned P-C as part of the E1 Rancho del Rey plan. It is now recommended that it be prezoned R-1-H-P to conform to the zoning of the adjacent tract. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Starr-Smith) The Commission finds that in accordance with the Negative Declaration on IS-76-13 and the findings stated therein, this project will have no significant adverse environmental impacts, and certifies that the Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with CEQA, 1970, as amended. MSUC (Starr-Smith) Based on the findings stated in the report to the Commission, the Commission recommends that the City Council approve the change of prezoning of 2.5 acres located at the easterly terminus of East J Street to R-1-H-P. -2- - April 12, 1976 2. Consideration of Shattuck East J Street Annexation Director of Planning Peterson reported that Mr. J.R. Shattuck has petitioned for annexation of the 2.5 acres involved in the previous hearing for prezoning to the City of Chula Vista in order that development plans may be considered. He recommended that the boundaries of the annexation as shown on the plat be approved and the staff authorized to file the petition for annexation with the Local Agency Formation Commission. MSUC (Floto-Smith) The Commission approves the boundaries of the Shattuck East J Street Annexation as proposed and authorizes the staff to file the petition with the Local Agency Formation Commission. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Tentative Map PCS-76-1 for South BaS Villas Unit #2 - ShattUck COnstrUction Company Director of Planning Peterson advised that this tentative map provides for the extension of East "J" Street and the creation of 9 single family residential lots. He called attention to three conditions recommended in approving the tentative map. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. As no one wished to speak the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Starr-Smith) The Commission recommends to the City Council the approval of the tentative map PCS-76-1 for South Bay Villas Unit #2, based on the findings of consistency with the General Plan and the conditions recommended in the report to the Commission. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional use permit PCC-76-3 - Request for sale of beer and Wine at Pizza Hut Restaurant at 271 Orange Avenue in C-N zone Current Planning Supervisor Lee reported that the applicant is proposing to locate a restaurant facility in an existing building in the shopping center complex at Orange and Melrose Avenue, with the sale of beer and wine to be incidental to the restaurant operation. He pointed out that this facility would be located between two larger market operations and that it is 200 feet from the rear of the building to the nearest residences. Most of the activity of this restaurant would be at the front of the structure adjacent to the shopping center parking lot and should be of no detriment to the residential use in the area. He noted that the application is categorically exempt from environmental review requirements and recommended approval of the application for a conditional use permit as requested. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Keith Taylor, representing the applicant and also the owner of the property, expressed concurrence with the information in the staff report and indicated he had nothing further to add unless the Commission had some questions. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. -3- - April 12, 1976 Commissioner Rudolph expressed the opinion that as an incidental use to the restaurant facility, the sale of beer and wine would be compatible in this shopping - center. MSC (Rudolph-Smith) Conditional Use Permit PCC-76-3 for the sale of beer and wine at a Pizza Hut Restaurant at 271 Orange Avenue is approved, based on the findings as stated in the report to the Commission. The motion passed by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Rudolph, Smith, Chandler and Starr NOES: Commissioner Floto ABSENT: Commissioners Johnson and Pressutti 5. Consideration of Annexation of County owned property located at the northeast Corner of East "H" Street and Hillto~ Drive Director of Planning Peterson noted that the property under consideration is owned by the County of San Diego as a result of acquisition of land for the extension of East "H" Street from Hilltop Drive to 1-805. The County now proposes to sell this excess property but agreed to initiate annexation prior to the sale so that public improvements could be required under City regulations with the development of the property. Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt noted that although Hilltop Drive and the street improvements are in the City, the abutting properties on the east side in the block north from H Street are in the County. The closing of Claire Avenue, concurrent with the Extension of "H" Street, increased the need for a sidewalk along the north side of Hilltop Drive to serve school children. He advised that the property owner at the southeast corner of E1 Rancho Vista and Hilltop Drive had voluntarily installed sidewalk on his portion of street front- age; the other two property owners in that block had declined to install sidewalks. It is hoped that with the sale of the lot proposed for annexation, a short 1911 Act could be initiated to install sidewalk along the remaining three lots. Commissioner Starr asked if there would be restrictions on access to "H" Street from the subject property. Commissioner Smith noted that unless that portion of East "H" Street is included in the annexation, it would remain in the County and we would not have control over the location of curb cuts. Director of Planning Peterson felt it would be appropriate to include the width of "H" Street in the proposed annexation. MSUC (Smith-Starr) The Commission approves the boundaries of the annexation at the northeast corner of East "H" Street and Hilltop Drive including the full width of "H" Street. 6. PUBLIC HEARING; Consideration of Planned Unit Development PUD-76-1~ Robinhood Point Current Planning Supervisor Lee advised that development of this area was first approved six years ago under the P-C zone for 1200 dwelling units. Since that time the area west of Brandywine Avenue has been rezoned R-l-5 and R-1-P and -4- - April 12, 1976 developed with approximately 300 townhouse units, leaving 108 acres for the - development of the remaining 900 dwelling units. In 1973 plans were filed by American Housing Guild and approved for the construc- tion of 291 units in the area east of Brandywine Avenue. The current plan, filed by Robinhood Homes, Inc., calls for a like number of single family detached homes, to be located in 41 cluster areas, located in the same configuration as the plan formerly approved for American Housing Guild. The new plans, however, have expanded the size of individual lots, thus resulting in less common area to be maintained by a home owners association. Where the previous plan had lots ranging from 3,000 to 4,000 sq. ft. in size, the new plan has lots ranging from 4,000 sq. ft. to 9,000 sq. ft. The development would still contain about 40 acres of slopes, which would be landscaped, watered and maintained as common open space. The second major change is the range of house sizes from 1487-2822 sq. ft. to 1058-1847 sq. ft. This will provide housing at a more moderate price and help to fulfill the aims of the Housing Element of providing suitable housing for a wide economic sprect~um. The plan still includes a common recreation area, recreational vehicle storage area, and a small commercial site. In addition , residential construction tax monies to be paid by the developer will be available to improve a City owned 4 1/2 acre park site acquired through previous park land dedications. Mr. Lee noted that the project will be divided into four phases and that detailed plans were submitted only for Unit #1, which will include the recreational area. He briefly discussed the house designs, fencing and landscaping, calling attention to the 15 conditions recommended for approval of the project. He asked that condition 8 be amended to require automatic garage door openers for driveways 20~ or less in length, rather than 22'. He also suggested that condition 5 be amended to also require that a portion of the recreational vehicle storage area be constructed with Unit #1. The Commission raised questions concerning the siting of houses on the lots, adequacy of guest parking, and parking for recreational vehicles. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Pat MacIsaac, representing Bob Casey, advised that each house is sited on the lot with careful consideration given to the view. In accordance with the staff recommendation the CC&R's will prohibit the parking of any type of recreational vehicle within the cul-de-sac areas; such conditions will be policed by the home owners association and he felt they would be carefully enforced. Henrietta Kuleske, resident of the Brandywine condominium project for the past four years, pointed out that Brandywine Unit 1 has nearly 200 homes and Unit 2 has 150; since Brandywine Avenue is closed off at the northern boundary of Unit 2, access to that number of homes is limited and circuitous. She felt that if additional development is approved it should include additional access. She also spoke of the need for a park in the area, which had been promised to the residents of Brandywine Unit 1 but never completed. - -5- -~ April 12, 1976 George Kuleske, 1555-150 Mendocino Drive, spoke further on the need for park facilities and suggested that money collected from the developer for park develop- ment should be spent for that purpose before inflation reduced its value. George Pappas, representing the Omar Rendering Company, spoke in opposition to the Planned Unit Development and the tentative map. He voiced the opinion that residential development should not be approved adjacent to an industrial plant, pointing out that this jeopardizes the industrial use. He contended that the City should provide a buffer or similar protective barrier between a residential use and an industrial use which has been in that particular location for a number of years. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Rudolph asked the staff to address the problem posed by Mr. Pappas and to explain the park fees required of this development. Mr. Lee advised that the 4 1/2 acre park site adjacent to Sequoia Street was acquired through dedication in connection with the previous Brandywine develop- ment. Fees collected from this development will allow the City to proceed with the development of that park site. He also noted that a smaller private recrea- tional area will be developed with the first phase of the proposed development. With regard to the industrial use adjacent to this site, Mr. Lee pointed out that the City has performance standards that apply to all industrial uses and if these are complied with the industrial use should be compatible with resi- dential use. He also advised that the sanitary land fill site to the east of this proposal is ear marked for a regional park in about 1985. Mr. Lee further noted that the proposed development plans provide for a berm and landscaping at the southerly boundary of the project and that the houses in that area will be oriented toward the center of the project, away from the industrial use. Commissioner Smith questioned the adequacy of the 3" P.C.C. paving for driveways as required in condition no. 9. Assistant Director of Public Works Lippitt reported that it is common practice to use 2X4's for forming driveways and this results in closer to 3 1/2" thickness of concrete which is adequate for private driveways. It was also pointed out that this condition applies only to driveways and guest parking areas and not to the private court streets which will consist of asphalt paving. MSUC (Rudolph-Floto) The Commission recommends to the City Council the approval of PUD-76-1 subject to the conditions contained in the report to the Commission with modification to condition 8 to stipulate 20' long driveways, the inclusion in condition 5 of the requirement that a proportional amount of the recreational vehicle storage area be constructed with Unit #1, and the addition of condition 16 to require that residential construction tax pa~ents be made concurrent with the issuance of building permits. 7. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Tentative Map PCS-76-2 - Robinhood Point Current Planning Supervisor Lee noted that most aspects of the development were -6- - April 12, 1976 covered in considering the Planned Unit Development, however, the Planning Commission is required to approve street names for new subdivisions. A list of names as proposed by the developer is included in the staff report for the Commission's consideration. It is recommended that the Commission approve those names submitted for Units 1 and 2 and direct that street names for Units 3 and 4 be submitted to the Planning staff for approval prior to submission of final maps to the City Council. Mr. Lee also pointed out the state requirement that findings of consistency with the adopted General Plan and its various elements are required for the approval of a proposed subdivision. He noted that this developer is trying to reach a w~der spectrum of income levels in the sale of the houses, and thus complies with the aim of the Housing Element. Findings of consistency with other elements of the General Plan are contained in the staff report. Mr. Lee called attention to the list of 21 conditions to be met by the developer in preparation of the final map. This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Kuleske asked if it is possible to obtain a copy of the proposed conditions, and was advised he could get a copy from the Planning Department office. He expressed concern that some of the conditions may not be met. Assistant City Attorney Beam explained that when a final map is approved, the City and developer enter into an agreement for the improvements required in connection with the development; such improvements are guaranteed by a bonding company so there is no question of their being installed. Mrs. Kuleske commented that if the total $90,000 for park improvement is not collected until all units are built, it will be 1980 before the park is available. Mr. Lee advised that park improvements may be installed in phases as money becomes available. As no one else wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSUC (Starr-Rudolph) The Commission recommends to the City Council the approval of tentative map PCS-76-2 for Robinhood Point, based on the findings and subject to the conditions as enumerated in the report to the Commission. 8. Consideration of Redevelopment Plan for Third Avenue Director of Planning Peterson advised that the document as presented is primarily a legal document designed to establish the area as a redevelopment area under the State redevelopment law. The bulk of the actual planning work for the area will be contained in the Design Manual which is now being compiled and will contain fairly detailed development standards for the area. It may also contain specific design criteria for some areas; one such location might be the vicinity of Center Street and Landis. The Design Manual may also include typical plans which property owners or developers could look toward in developing their sites. ~' -7- '~ April 12, 1976 Mr. Peterson noted that the Redevelopment Plan is not a short term project but ~s a guide for evolutionary redevelopment over a period of many years. The action required by the Commission is a motion certifying that the EIR has been considered, that the Redevelopment Plan conforms to the City's General Plan and a recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency for adoption of the plan. Commissioner Rudolph questioned the meaning of viscosity in relation to town planning. Mr. Peterson advised that since that meaning is not clear, the word will be deleted from the draft before the report is submitted to the Redevelopment Agency. Commissioner Smith noted there was a comment about individual entrepreneurs proceeding with their portion of the redevelopment, but pointed out there is a very large s~ction in the report ~about the acquisition by eminent domain or otherwise of anybody's land that doesn't conform to the powers of this agency. He contended that sounds like the Agency will use taxes which are collected from people outside to condemn the land of the people inside of this project. Community Development Director Desrochers explained that if the Redevelopment Agency is to be able to assemble property for development that procedure must be in the plan, however, its use must make sense. He pointed out that the tax increment money this plan is capable of generating at this time is not sufficient for wide scale acquisition. Mr. Peterson added that this is in the nature of an enabling feature which will · not often be used. Assistant City Attorney Beam reported that he had asked Commissioner Floto to abstain from discussion or voting on this item due to his business interest within the project area. He suggested that if the matter does not proceed from this meeting with an affirmative recommendation it would be advisable to reconsider it when the full Commission is present. Mr. Desrochers advised that the next meeting of the Redevelopment Agency will be May 6, therefore, there will be another Commission meeting prior to that date if the Commission desires to delay taking action. MS (Rudolph-Starr) Consideration of the Redevelopment Plan for Third Avenue be continued for two weeks. The motion failed to obtain a majority of the full Commission vote, as follows; AYES: Commissioners Rudolph, Starr, Chandler NOES: Commissioner Smith ABSTAIN: Commissioner Floto ABSENT: Commissioners Pressutti and Johnson Attorney Beam ruled that Commissioner Floto could vote on the motion for continuance since such action is not for or against the project under considera- tion. Commissioner Floto then voted and the motion for continuance to the meeting of April 26 was declared passed. -8- April 12, 1976 Commissioner Smith advised that he did not support the project because of the power of condemnation of private property for other private development, and because he felt the project would be subsidized by taxpayers outside of the project since no increase in tax money from that area would go to support other agencies. Attorney Beam explained that his concern in suggesting a continuation of the item was that he would prefer that the action of the Commission be taken at one time. Since it seemed apparent there would be no possibility for conclusive action either approving ~o~denying the plan at this meeting, he felt it should be continued to a date when such action would be possible. D~RECTOR'S REPORT Director of Planning Peterson reported that at next week's study session a briefing would be presented by a representative of the San Diego City Planning Department on their growth control program. He also called attention to the announcement of the Short Course for Planning Commissioners by the University of California at Berkeley. He reported that there are sufficient funds in the Con~ission's travel budget account to enable at least one and possibly two or three Commissioners to attend. He asked that any Commissioners interested in attending this seminar notify the office. COMMISSION COMMENTS Chairman Chandler stated that he would be out of town and unable to attend the study session on April 19th but would be back for the regular meeting on April 26th. Mr. Chandler also commented on new apartment construction on F Street in which a second story overhang extends nearly to the side property line. Commissioner Smith asked that the development be checked to see if it conforms to the ordinance and if so determine whether the ordinance is adequate. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Chandler adjourned the meeting at 8:43 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ~elen Mapes, Secret/&ry